{"title":"Cognitive control, stress, and depressive symptoms: A short-term longitudinal test of the Dual Mechanisms of Control framework","authors":"Akihiro Masuyama","doi":"10.1016/j.jbtep.2026.102100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Depression has been linked to impairments in cognitive control, particularly proactive control within the Dual Mechanisms of Control framework, yet little is known about how proactive control, perceived stress, and depressive symptoms co-vary within and between individuals over time. In a three-wave online study, 195 adults completed monthly assessments of depressive symptoms, perceived stress, and an AX Continuous Performance Task. Random Effects Within–Between (REWB) models were used as the primary analytic approach to examine between-person differences and within-person month-to-month deviations in perceived stress and proactive control, whereas Cross-Lagged Panel Models (CLPMs) and Random Intercept CLPMs (RI-CLPMs) were estimated as auxiliary analyses. Across reaction-time and error-rate REWB models, perceived stress showed robust positive associations with depressive symptoms at both levels. Proactive control showed no consistent effects when stress was at its mean level, but small within-person perceived stress × proactive control interactions indicated weaker concurrent stress–depression coupling during higher-than-usual stress periods. In contrast, CLPM and RI-CLPM showed poor fit and negligible cross-lagged effects. Overall, proactive control appears to function primarily as a modest, context-dependent moderator of stress–depression covariation rather than a strong longitudinal driver of change.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48198,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","volume":"92 ","pages":"Article 102100"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005791626000157","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Depression has been linked to impairments in cognitive control, particularly proactive control within the Dual Mechanisms of Control framework, yet little is known about how proactive control, perceived stress, and depressive symptoms co-vary within and between individuals over time. In a three-wave online study, 195 adults completed monthly assessments of depressive symptoms, perceived stress, and an AX Continuous Performance Task. Random Effects Within–Between (REWB) models were used as the primary analytic approach to examine between-person differences and within-person month-to-month deviations in perceived stress and proactive control, whereas Cross-Lagged Panel Models (CLPMs) and Random Intercept CLPMs (RI-CLPMs) were estimated as auxiliary analyses. Across reaction-time and error-rate REWB models, perceived stress showed robust positive associations with depressive symptoms at both levels. Proactive control showed no consistent effects when stress was at its mean level, but small within-person perceived stress × proactive control interactions indicated weaker concurrent stress–depression coupling during higher-than-usual stress periods. In contrast, CLPM and RI-CLPM showed poor fit and negligible cross-lagged effects. Overall, proactive control appears to function primarily as a modest, context-dependent moderator of stress–depression covariation rather than a strong longitudinal driver of change.
期刊介绍:
The publication of the book Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition (1958) by the co-founding editor of this Journal, Joseph Wolpe, marked a major change in the understanding and treatment of mental disorders. The book used principles from empirical behavioral science to explain psychopathological phenomena and the resulting explanations were critically tested and used to derive effective treatments. The second half of the 20th century saw this rigorous scientific approach come to fruition. Experimental approaches to psychopathology, in particular those used to test conditioning theories and cognitive theories, have steadily expanded, and experimental analysis of processes characterising and maintaining mental disorders have become an established research area.